This is a very bad idea, catered to the loudest MP complainers, that will severely detract from the rate at which bugs get found by severely cutting down the tester base.
Now the game gets tested by instead of thousands of players a day, by, luckily two dozens nice enough to take the time, but a few dozen playstyles don't represent ALL the possible playstyles, which means bugs will slip past us, and then at stable release, we get to read tons of complaints and rants about the ugliest uncommon bug that nobody thought to test for, and why are Keen and the testers so incompetent.

In summary... very bad idea, this is the first patch thread that gets my dislike ever since I bought the game.

This is a very bad idea, catered to the loudest MP complainers, that will severely detract from the rate at which bugs get found by severely cutting down the tester base.
Now the game gets tested by instead of thousands of players a day, by, luckily two dozens nice enough to take the time, but a few dozen playstyles don't represent ALL the possible playstyles, which means bugs will slip past us, and then at stable release, we get to read tons of complaints and rants about the ugliest uncommon bug that nobody thought to test for, and why are Keen and the testers so incompetent.

In summary... very bad idea, this is the first patch thread that gets my dislike ever since I bought the game.

Click to expand...

i have to disagree... You have a chance for the bug to be discovered in the dev branch. Then if it's a pesky bug then it may still be discovered when reaching the stable version. No hurt in that.
In the end, the stable version should receive less bugs, and at the worst you are delaying the bug detection for 1 month.

i have to disagree... You have a chance for the bug to be discovered in the dev branch. Then if it's a pesky bug then it may still be discovered when reaching the stable version. No hurt in that.
In the end, the stable version should receive less bugs.

Click to expand...

how many people do you think will be playing dev? Stable is default, so the vast majority of people will be on that branch

i have to disagree... You have a chance for the bug to be discovered in the dev branch. Then if it's a pesky bug then it may still be discovered when reaching the stable version.

Click to expand...

Except that won't necessarily happen. They are two very different versions of the game and they're only going to get more different to each other as time goes on. Unexpected bugs will happen, mistakes will happen, a lack of testing will happen. Not only will Dev Branch not catch all the bugs, the introduction of Dev Branch code to Stable Branch code will likely introduce a bunch of new ones. Stuff breaks all the time. And then you're going to have to check, doublecheck and recheck where that bug comes from, and fix it, potentially seperately in both Branches.

Nobody ↑ :

In the end, the stable version should receive less bugs.

Click to expand...

I really, really doubt that. There's just too much different code involved now.

Yeah, that's not gonna happen. It's WAY too much effort to maintain two versions of all your mods.--- Automerge ---

how many people do you think will be playing dev? Stable is default, so the vast majority of people will be on that branch

Click to expand...

With the stable branch being default, the Dev branch will likely have more of the audeince that beta testing would be targeting (people who are aware of multiple branches and competent enough to switch branches)

Yeah, that's not gonna happen. It's WAY too much effort to maintain two versions of all your mods.

Click to expand...

And maintain a mods for a single version has already proven difficult or at least time consuming. Reminder that @midspace's SET is a lifesaver i probably couldn't endure SE without. Related reminder that the Station-Ship-bug is still happening as of yesterday.--- Automerge ---

Gotta agree with Rotal for the most part, the two different branches will mess up a good portion of the testing process and the ability to communicate current problems. That said, I would rather have the stable branch only and no weekly dev updates.

i have to disagree... You have a chance for the bug to be discovered in the dev branch. Then if it's a pesky bug then it may still be discovered when reaching the stable version. No hurt in that.
In the end, the stable version should receive less bugs, and at the worst you are delaying the bug detection for 1 month.

Click to expand...

While adding more programmers doesn't improve the development speed, adding more testers does improve the testing process.
A practical example: if only I, and I alone, was the sole tester in all of SE, I can guarantee you that tons of bugs related to rotors and merge blocks would have totally slipped past me, never resolved, basically because I don't use those blocks frequently. Change me with anyone else and change rotors with any other kind of block or specific type of gameplay, and stuff will be missed.
This is mathematical, unavoidable, hope or good luck have nothing to do here, if no one in the small pool of testers is playing a certain way, then bugs related to that certain way will not be found until the build hits stable branch. And this can happen not just with one, but with dozens of more critical issues, because the testers are not perfect, and don't have to be experts on the usage of every block in the game, which is the problem inherent to using just a few tester compared to using tons of people that do tons of different things.

@Xocliw I have a couple questions regarding the separation of dev and stable versions:
- How will the dual-build system affect the weekly update videos/notes?
- Will the weekly update videos/notes be geared to the development branch only?
- Will there be a special update video for the monthly stable-branch rollouts?
- With the weekly dev branch rollout, does this mean we'll get a better insight as to what items are WIP in the background?
- Cake or Pie?

Yeah, that's not gonna happen. It's WAY too much effort to maintain two versions of all your mods.--- Automerge ---

how many people do you think will be playing dev? Stable is default, so the vast majority of people will be on that branch

Click to expand...

Ehh no, you don't need to maintain 2 versions. You will just maintain the dev branch, but yeah you need to freeze it at the same time they do the stable branch and update your stable mod. It adds some overhead just ONCE a month copying a folder and updating. You might do a batch file for that.
Also, I'm not saying that it is a good thing. I'm just sharing my way of dealing with it.

And why no one quote my last line? the worst thing that will happen is that the bug will pass undetected and reach the general public, they will experience it a month later tho. But it is a one time delay once.
Maybe 2-branching is not good for a number of things, but the bugs will be discovered anyways.

Ehh no, you don't need to maintain 2 versions. You will just maintain the dev branch, but yeah you need to freeze it at the same time they do the stable branch and update your stable mod. Also, I'm not saying that it is a good thing. I'm just sharing my way of dealing with it.

And why no one quote my last line? the worst thing that will happen is that the bug will pass undetected and reach the general public, they will experience it a month later tho. But it is a one time delay once.
Maybe 2-branching is not good for a nomber of things, but the bugs will be discovered anyways.

Click to expand...

Then they'll have to experience that bug for a month, since stable branches won't be updated as frequently, If a bug gets into it, it will be there for a month roughly.

Good idea to have separate STABLE and DEV branches. This way, folks, who don't want to deal with development wonkiness, can just play the game. As for me, I'll go with the DEV branch. Might be able to help find bugs.

They should have made the dev default and the stable optional, would still allow people who don't want to deal with the weekly updates able to but the dev branch would be getting the attention it needs as the default branch. But either way, we will still have problems with communication and bug reports.

Then they'll have to experience that bug for a month, since stable branches won't be updated as frequently, If a bug gets into it, it will be there for a month roughly.

Click to expand...

Yes they will, but are bound to be rarer bugs.
Right now, we have to experience a bug that is found in 5 minutes of play, for the entire week. This should not happen anymore.
And I think that if they find a critical bug in the stable branch they might update it on patch day, not necessarily a month after. We will have to wait and see.
But me and all the server admins will have a lot less overhead work maintaining our servers. In fact, I left my server offline because it was too much work. Now with the stable system I will put it online again .D

Update 01.140 dev version
The development branch contains several work-in-progress planet improvements that are not ready to be moved to the stable branch - please try out the dev branch if you want to help us test them!
For those who want to access the dev branch (updated weekly rather than monthly) on Steam, you can do so using the BETA tab.

To fix exactly this problem they should have disabled mods from the testing branche. I've been linked ships with dozens, sometimes literally a hundred mods or more. Have fun waiting for those to update for both versions...

Click to expand...

Then no one will play dev, and it'll be useless. They should have just changed to a biweekly release schedule with a single branch.

Yes they will, but are bound to be rarer bugs.
Right now, we have to experience a bug that is found in 5 minutes of play, for the entire week. This will not happen anymore.
And I think that if they find a critical bug in the stable branch they might update it on patch day, not necessarily a month after. We will have to wait and see.
But me and all the server admins will have a lot less overhead work maintaining our servers.

Click to expand...

Less testers means less bugs are found and fixed, you will still have bugs found within 5 minutes of playing but they won't be patched for a month. I would rather have it fixed within a week than wait a month. And actually it will be more work for us if mod dev decide to use the dev branch as it could wreck havoc on a ds. I run my own ds so I am most concerned about this problem.

Less testers means less bugs are found and fixed, you will still have bugs found within 5 minutes of playing but they won't be patched for a month. I would rather have it fixed within a week than wait a month. And actually it will be more work for us if mod dev decide to use the dev branch as it could wreck havoc on a ds. I run my own ds so I am most concerned about this problem.

Click to expand...

Well, this is actually a fault of keen not thinking on a good mod system before launching the branching.
Imagine this, if the stable version would load cubeblock.sbc but the dev version would look for d_cubeblock.sbc.
On stable release day, modder just overwrite files with d_ files, keeps working on d_ files. OR just a DEV subfolder with the dev version.
You could have both versions on the same mod. You can suggest a better way too.

Then no one will play dev, and it'll be useless. They should have just changed to a biweekly release schedule with a single branch.

Click to expand...

And then it will have it's own set of problems. People don't get it there's no right or wrong way just that each has its own sets of pros and cons. It's a matter of finding what fits best and that can only happen if they experiment.
P.S. Most people who submit bug reports are people who deal with the bugs and would like to stay on the dev branch.

The way the branches will work, to my understanding, the "non-stable" branch(s) will be included into the "stable" branch after one month.
So there is no reason to fear the branches being two separate games entirely.

On the modding side of things as long as modders make their mods in the stable branch, they will most likely work in the non stable branch.
The only reason Keen mentions about mods being made in the non stable version of the game not working in the stable version, is that in a very simple term everyone should understand, it will cause a version mismatch error.

Yes. I do this with other games that have multiple branches. Set the Steam updates for SE to "Only update this game when I launch it." Make a copy of the Space Engineers folder in Steam\common.

I use this naming scheme:

Dev Branch: Space Engineers_Dev
Stable Branch: Space Engineers_Stable

To play a particular version, you drop the "_Dev" or "_Stable" from the folder name of the version you are going to play and set the branch in the Betas tab for Steam to the version you are going to play. WARNING: if you launch the game while in the wrong branch, you will update that folder to the branch you're in (i.e - Dev downgraded to Stable, or Stable updated to Dev.) So, be careful.

Edit: Actually, looks like you're going to get an update regardless. This doesn't happen for me with other games that I've done this with. So, you don't really have to do what I suggest, but it might be helpful to some.

No. Stable branch is the stable branch and Dev branch is the development branch. Which you are playing just happens to be controlled under a tab in Steam called "Betas." Has nothing to do with the game actually being in beta. DayZ, for example, has a stable and experimental branch - both are aspects of the early access alpha.